Are Catholics Christians?

[Bondman]

Catholic belief and practice are so wide that two people can claim the same church and be worlds apart in how they understand and live their faith. Many know ever saint and every feast day but couldn't tell you the first point of doctrine (their training probably stopped at age 12 after their confirmation).

So we must ask what is it that they all have in common?

There is indeed a great divergence of belief in RC, but as long as you bow the knee to the Pope in Rome, he will let you believe just about whatever you want. You can practice voodoo (yes, in Haiti) or celebrate pagan holy days (all over the world since the beginning of the spread of Rome's dominance) or whatever. Just join yourself to that man that has raised himself above everything that is called God.

 

[Iconoclast]

Interestingly enough, I just stumbled upon this:

Members in the past have been banned only after sufficient warning and repeated violations of Board Rules, behavior unbecoming a Christian and/or espousing heresy (such as the Federal Vision, Roman Catholicism or Modalism).

This comes from this very site, which apparently considers RC heresy.

We must be careful to seperate the heretical Roman teachings,from the actual people in the churches,most of whom do not even know the issues at hand. The church teaching is a wicked mix of truth and error which if ingested is spiritually deadly.
Some RC's are actually surprised to find out what the official teaching of the church is. Most do not believe or adhere to the actual teaching of the church, but consider the teaching optional.

 

[Javilo]

So many helpful posts. Thanks.
Would it be safe to say that Catholicism isn't a cult
since they are trinitarian but they are a false church
because they don't beliieve in justification by faith alone.
I know a catholic apologist who says that he can't find
justification by faith alone before the reformation-16 century.
I researched and couldn't find much.
Maybe he is correct but doesn't going to church history
denying sola scriptura?

 

[BobVigneault]

I wouldn't call the RCC a cult. I would contend that there are cults within the Roman Church. Those that venerate and worship Mary and especially those who consider her a co-redemptrix make up a cult within the church.

 

[Davidius]

Catholic belief and practice are so wide that two people can claim the same church and be worlds apart in how they understand and live their faith. Many know ever saint and every feast day but couldn't tell you the first point of doctrine (their training probably stopped at age 12 after their confirmation).

So we must ask what is it that they all have in common?

There is indeed a great divergence of belief in RC, but as long as you bow the knee to the Pope in Rome, he will let you believe just about whatever you want. You can practice voodoo (yes, in Haiti) or celebrate pagan holy days (all over the world since the beginning of the spread of Rome's dominance) or whatever. Just join yourself to that man that has raised himself above everything that is called God.

That's interesting. Could you post me a quote from a source of Roman teaching that says that one can believe whatever he wants as long as he "bows the knee to the Pope"? I spoke with a woman just yesterday who is leaving the Roman Catholic Church for the Episcopalian Church because she is unscripturally divorced and Roman priests won't allow her to commune.

 

[kalawine]

Interestingly enough, I just stumbled upon this:

Members in the past have been banned only after sufficient warning and repeated violations of Board Rules, behavior unbecoming a Christian and/or espousing heresy (such as the Federal Vision, Roman Catholicism or Modalism).

This comes from this very site, which apparently considers RC heresy.

Good point!

 

[kalawine]

It's been my experience that there are more lifetime "Protestants" defending the Catholic cause than there are exCatholics. I've known people who actually believe that they were delivered from Babylon and false religion (out of the RCC) when they were saved.

Kevin, fascinating observation! Yes! Most of the people who go squishy on Catholicism are lifelong Protestants. In my circles, the most unyieldingly vigorous opponents of the Roman church are those who see themselves as "delivered from Babylon," angry at being "dupped" for so many years, and those who knew it up close. It is easy for some of us to be "broad minded" when we only "know" it from afar.

Yes, and I believe that the ex RC'rs know how the "church" actually kept them in darkness for years. As Reformed believers we know that only regeneration by the Spirit's power can cause a blind man to see (RC or not). But Satan has his devices and I believe that the RCC is one of them.

 

[yeutter]

cult or apostate

I wouldn't call the RCC a cult. I would contend that there are cults within the Roman Church. Those that venerate and worship Mary and especially those who consider her a co-redemptrix make up a cult within the church.

I would agree. The Roman Church still teaches the full divinity and humanity of our Lord. She rightly teaches the Trinity. Therefore The Roman Church is technically not a cult.
The Church of Rome is an apostate Church. She became apostate at Trent, when she rejected the Biblical doctrine of justification by faith alone. She further lapsed into apostacy when she became semi pelagian in her condemnation of the Jansenists. She fell still further at Vatican I when she taught the Immaculate conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary and taught Papal infallibility. She further ran headlong into aposatcy with the relativistic teachings of Vatican II.

 

[christiana]

I've known some catholics that acknowledge some sound doctrines as those we know to be the doctrines of grace. However, they continue to cling to their church as the ONLY church, submitting to the rule of the pope, worship and prayer to Mary and other idolatrous systems.

Reminds me of that joke where the guy is clinging to a slender tree over a cliff and yells, 'Isnt there a God to save me?' He hears a voice saying, 'turn loose of the tree and trust in Me'. Then he responds, 'isnt there anyone else out there?' They can acknowledge all the doctrine they choose but yet they still wont turn loose of their supposed 'real' church and trust only the very real Jesus Christ as their Savior. They want to have it both ways!

 

[wturri78]

Catholic belief and practice are so wide that two people can claim the same church and be worlds apart in how they understand and live their faith. Many know ever saint and every feast day but couldn't tell you the first point of doctrine (their training probably stopped at age 12 after their confirmation).

So we must ask what is it that they all have in common?

There is indeed a great divergence of belief in RC, but as long as you bow the knee to the Pope in Rome, he will let you believe just about whatever you want. You can practice voodoo (yes, in Haiti) or celebrate pagan holy days (all over the world since the beginning of the spread of Rome's dominance) or whatever. Just join yourself to that man that has raised himself above everything that is called God.

Again there is a wide separation between the doctrines espoused in the official creeds and documents, and that believed by people in the pews. I think it's accurate to say that a bare minimum is to believe in the authority of the church (and especially of the pope) and in their doctrine of the Eucharist. However, I've talked to a fair number of "cradle Catholics" who can't really recall what Transubstantiation means, and don't think the church really really means it's literal flesh and blood. Many do take the "buffet" approach and seem to think they have the leeway to pick and choose which teachings they personally want to hold. It seems the definition of "infallible" doctrine can be extremely narrow when necessary, but otherwise so vague that someone can say "well, that point was never infallibly declared..."

 

[cih1355]

If a Roman Catholic is someone who believes what the Roman Catholic church teaches, then Roman Catholics are not saved. They are not Christians. The Roman Catholic church teaches that our obedience to God is what increases or preserves our justification.

If someone in the Roman Catholic church believes that we are justified by faith alone and that our obedience to God does not contribute to our justification, then he is not really a Roman Catholic.

 

[pilgrim3970]

I ask if Catholics are Christians since they include works as part of
justification. So would it be proper to evangelize Catholics as one would any
unsaved person? Also, doesn't purgatory deny the sufficiency of the cross?

I dunno, are Arminian, Dispensational, Baptists?

After all, I believe the aforementioned group is in error regarding the doctrine of Salvation, in their handling of Scripture (is not belief in a rebuilt temple and reinstitution of the temple sacrifices common? Does this not deny the sufficiency of the cross?), and in their view of the Sacraments.

Not defending the errors of Rome, but I think that insofar as they accept and teach the tenets of the faith expressed in the ecumenical creeds - yes, they are Christians. Insofar as they accept doctrines such as purgatory, transubstantiation, innvocation of the saints, and misuse the idea of tradition by exalting it over the authority of Scripture, they are dangerously in error and should be, whenever the opportunity arises, taught a better way.

 

[pilgrim3970]

It's been my experience that there are more lifetime "Protestants" defending the Catholic cause than there are exCatholics. I've known people who actually believe that they were delivered from Babylon and false religion (out of the RCC) when they were saved.

Kevin, fascinating observation! Yes! Most of the people who go squishy on Catholicism are lifelong Protestants. In my circles, the most unyieldingly vigorous opponents of the Roman church are those who see themselves as "delivered from Babylon," angry at being "dupped" for so many years, and those who knew it up close. It is easy for some of us to be "broad minded" when we only "know" it from afar.

I think that goes both ways though because I know quite a few protestants who have swam the Tiber and are equally critical of Protestantism as Roman Catholics.

 

[jogri17]

I hold to the Sproul/Mohler posistion. For many centuries the Catholic Church was a true Church but during the medevil years it evolved to a point where it could no longer be considered one. But the Catholic Church now may have some genuine all be it nominal christians who are ignorant but have true saving faith in Christ. Because it is by Faith alone that we are justified not a mental conaissance of it. There are many protestants who believe we can loose our salvation but as wrong as they are, I do believe many are Christians.

 

[Galatians220]

Very basic: anyone who can sit in attendance through a Catholic mass without getting sick or at least a little squeamish may still have in his/her future a full apprehension of the real Gospel.

This was/is one of the innumerable indications that the Lord graciously gave me that I had been born again, "made new," "taken from darkness into light:" that I could no longer do something I'd done 1-3 times a week for decades, i.e., watch that "bloodless re-sacrifice" of the Son of God without feeling the palpable presence of evil.

Just my ' worth.

Margaret

 

[Stomata leontôn]

A side note.

I find it interesting that the Reformers used the word "catholic church" for the reformed church. They considered the Church of Rome not catholic at all, but a sect.

 

[yeutter]

Christians despite her teaching

I hold to the Sproul/Mohler posistion. For many centuries the Catholic Church was a true Church but during the medevil years it evolved to a point where it could no longer be considered one. But the Catholic Church now may have some genuine all be it nominal christians who are ignorant but have true saving faith in Christ. Because it is by Faith alone that we are justified not a mental conaissance of it. There are many protestants who believe we can loose our salvation but as wrong as they are, I do believe many are Christians.

If I understand you correctly you are saying the regenerate elect could be in the Church of Rome not because she preaches the Gospel, but despite the fact she does not teach the Gospel.

 

[beej6]

As one raised Catholic, with 95%+ of his family still Catholic, my simple answer to the OP is "Catholics may be Christians, despite the church they belong to." The key word is "despite." Dr. Kistler makes an excellent point - some may not really understand or agree with "official" Catholic doctrine. I also believe that leaders of any church - including Rome - will be held to a higher standard on the day of judgment, making it entirely possible that there may be a great number of Catholic saints from the pews yet precious few saints among the bishops, cardinals, and popes.

 

[pilgrim3970]

I also believe that leaders of any church - including Rome - will be held to a higher standard on the day of judgment, making it entirely possible that there may be a great number of Catholic saints from the pews yet precious few saints among the bishops, cardinals, and popes.

Unfortunately, that is the case with a lot of churches - the Anglican church is a prime example. For the most part, her apostasy is due to her leaders rather than the people in the pews. It was the leaders who did not teach sound doctrine, began ordaining women, gicen the stamp of approval to homosexual practices, and have finally proclaimed that Christ isn't necessarily the only way to the Father.

All the more reason to be in constant prayer for the clergy!!

 

[Neogillist]

I ask if Catholics are Christians since they include works as part of
justification. So would it be proper to evangelize Catholics as one would any
unsaved person? Also, doesn't purgatory deny the sufficiency of the cross?

I suppose that by "Catholics" you refer to "Roman Catholics." It would be more proper to call them "Romanists" since Catholicity refers to the universal Church. Consequently, all Christians are Catholics. Indeed, I like to call myself a "Reformed Catholic" just to show that I am in line with the historic Christian Faith and the Catholic monergists like Augustine.

Before the Reformation, the Roman Catholic Church was still a true church, however desperately corrupt it had got. It had no official doctrinal standards and many voices were accepted and tolerated. Then when the Reformers sought to bring back the church to monergism, the pope and his supporters (the papists) objected and wanted to officially adopt the Semi-Pelagianism of the Sophists along with all sorts of unscriptural practices such as the veneration of saints. Together they met and hardened themselves in their errors by adopting the doctrinal standards set forth at the Council of Trent. At that point the Roman Catholic church became a false church. Consequently, the Roman Catholic church is not a Christian church, since they reject Christ as their head and sole authority. Romanists need to be evangelized as much as Mormons and other cults, since they have little or no understanding of Christ and His Word.

As to whether Romanists can be in a "saved" state, Luther in "The Bondage of the Will" points out that although a believer may ignorantly be part of a false church for a period of time, God will providencially take him out of this false church and aquaint him with the true doctrines of the Scriptures in his life. This is why we are here on PB, not that we were all born and grew up Puritans, but that God eventually brought us into this state. As for Roman Catholics before Trent, of course many of them could have been true and genuine Christians.

 

[jogri17]

Very basic: anyone who can sit in attendance through a Catholic mass without getting sick or at least a little squeamish may still have in his/her future a full apprehension of the real Gospel.

This was/is one of the innumerable indications that the Lord graciously gave me that I had been born again, "made new," "taken from darkness into light:" that I could no longer do something I'd done 1-3 times a week for decades, i.e., watch that "bloodless re-sacrifice" of the Son of God without feeling the palpable presence of evil.

Just my ' worth.

Margaret

It"s easy to sit through one and be a Christian... I have my ipod and RC SProul dvds put on it in mpeg4 format.

 

[Davidius]

As to whether Romanists can be in a "saved" state, Luther in "The Bondage of the Will" points out that although a believer may ignorantly be part of a false church for a period of time, God will providencially take him out of this false church and aquaint him with the true doctrines of the Scriptures in his life. This is why we are here on PB, not that we were all born and grew up Puritans, but that God eventually brought us into this state. As for Roman Catholics before Trent, of course many of them could have been true and genuine Christians.

Of course, we know that Luther meant by this that God would providentially take a true Christian out of a false church and acquaint him with Lutheranism.

 

[jogri17]

I hold to the Sproul/Mohler posistion. For many centuries the Catholic Church was a true Church but during the medevil years it evolved to a point where it could no longer be considered one. But the Catholic Church now may have some genuine all be it nominal christians who are ignorant but have true saving faith in Christ. Because it is by Faith alone that we are justified not a mental conaissance of it. There are many protestants who believe we can loose our salvation but as wrong as they are, I do believe many are Christians.

If I understand you correctly you are saying the regenerate elect could be in the Church of Rome not because she preaches the Gospel, but despite the fact she does not teach the Gospel.

no absolutely not. I am saying that it is possible for a rare catholic priest to preach the true Gospel and a sinner to repent and believe the Gospel in that context or for a sinner to repent and believe outside of the church but die shortly after and not have sufficient amount of time to really study the importance of justification by faith alone thus he/she spend some time as a Christian attending a Roman church. I believe Rome teaches a perveted false Gospel as a organization, but like in any organization there is a local aspect. Its like the PCUSA (sorry to my PCUSA friends) in the sense that while those at the top are wrong there may be some small churches which are good. I have meet Catholic priests who believe in sola fide and are against praying to mary. They are sent to small rual catholic parishes.

 

[Quickened]

I used to be Catholic (born and raised) for a number of years. But i never really looked into the Council of Trent that people have mentioned neither have i looked into either of the vatican councils.

Is there something that would list or highlight the errors in those documents in light of scripture? I figure with all the books and documents out there that there must be something.

 

[Galatians220]

I used to be Catholic (born and raised) for a number of years. But i never really looked into the Council of Trent that people have mentioned neither have i looked into either of the vatican councils.

Is there something that would list or highlight the errors in those documents in light of scripture? I figure with all the books and documents out there that there must be something.

For starters:

Anathemas

and

http://www.geocities.com/peterpaulmin/CoucilofTrent.html.

They pronounce anyone who believes Romans 1:17 to be "anathema." Cursed. They give no place to Scripture; it's not relevant.

And then there's this: Vatican: Protestants Not 'Sister Churches' - Christianity Today magazine - ChristianityTodayLibrary.com.

Vatican II only reaffirmed the Council of Trent. It made no substantive changes in it.

Mike Gendron's Proclaiming The Gospel Ministries with Evangelist Mike Gendron - Home website, while not really Reformed, has gone into great and helpful detail over the years as to the corruption inherent in the RCC. The site's archives might be of some assistance to you.

Margaret

 

[MrMerlin777]

Some are, some aren't.

(Just like Presbyterians, Continental Reformeds, Lutherans, Anglicans, Baptists, Pentecostals, etc etc....)

 

[DMcFadden]

I think that goes both ways though because I know quite a few protestants who have swam the Tiber and are equally critical of Protestantism as Roman Catholics.

Absolutely! One of the churches I served called a fellow who was a Bahnsen disciple to follow me. He stayed for seven years, stood up one Sunday and announced to his Baptist flock that he was converting to Roman Catholicism. Evidently, Scott Hahn's writings won him over. Now he travels around doing "Christian apologetics" for the Romanists.

 

[Agustin]

I ask if Catholics are Christians since they include works as part of
justification. So would it be proper to evangelize Catholics as one would any
unsaved person? Also, doesn't purgatory deny the sufficiency of the cross?

+

Rome uses the same language, but means totally different things. For example Roman apologists have agreed with Protestants on things such as Sola Gratia, and Solus Christus, but in context these mean something particular, and not what the Protesatant would say. Basically its equivocal and they use this method only to equivocate and mislead people who do not know much of what Rome teaches.

 

[wturri78]

Before the Reformation, the Roman Catholic Church was still a true church, however desperately corrupt it had got. It had no official doctrinal standards and many voices were accepted and tolerated. Then when the Reformers sought to bring back the church to monergism, the pope and his supporters (the papists) objected and wanted to officially adopt the Semi-Pelagianism of the Sophists along with all sorts of unscriptural practices such as the veneration of saints. Together they met and hardened themselves in their errors by adopting the doctrinal standards set forth at the Council of Trent. At that point the Roman Catholic church became a false church. Consequently, the Roman Catholic church is not a Christian church, since they reject Christ as their head and sole authority. Romanists need to be evangelized as much as Mormons and other cults, since they have little or no understanding of Christ and His Word.

Does this mean that a church can still be Christian while allowing heresy to be taught and believed within its ranks, so long as it doesn't officially (a) enshrine those heresies in doctrinal creeds and/or (b) condemn the Biblical gospel? For example, many Eastern churches teach a very "free will" sort of gospel and deny sola fide, but do not officially condemn it as a false doctrine. In fact I've read some EO writings that say the Reformed doctrine "may be" right, but it's just not that important to be so theologically precise (you know, mystery).

Must a church condemn the Biblical gospel to be apostate, or does teaching a false gospel count?

 

[ColdSilverMoon]

Direct from the Roman Catholic Catechism:

1129 The Church affirms that for believers the sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation.

This is damnable heresy. So I agree with what others have repeated on this thread: one who believes as Rome does are not Christians, though it is unfair to assume that every lay member of the RCC is unsaved...